A year has flown by so fast that Academy Awards Telecast No. 84 is just around the corner. Actually, it's on Sunday, 26 February 2012 and the fun begins at 7:00 PM ET with the Oscar pre-show followed by the Academy Awards Telecast at 8:30 PM ET, all on your nearest ABC affiliate. For us here in the Tampa/St. Petersburg area, it's on WFTS-TV (also known as ABC Action News) on Channels 11 and 1011 for those of us connected to Bright House Networks and over the air Channel 28 for the traditional over the air folks.
Last year I put together a step by step diagram of the technical aspects of the Oscar telecast, especially the voice of the announcer when the announcer intones: The 84th Annual Academy Awards will return in a moment here on ABC.
After all, when an Academy Awards telecast is around the corner we know who will be the host of the telecast plus who is going to present the various awards throughout the course of the telecast. However, the one aspect of the Academy Awards telecast that does not get a lot of mention is who is going to be behind the microphone in the announcer's booth as the announcer of that year's Oscar telecast.
For the 84th Annual Academy Awards, it has been reported that Tom Kane will be returning for the announcing duties, according to this article in the Kansas City Star. (Here's another version of the article over at 913, Johnson County's (Kansas) News Magazine). However, Tom is going to get some help from a newcomer, making the Oscar telecast a co-announced telecast: Melissa Disney, who I understand this is her first time being the voice of an Oscar telecast.
This year, I did something better based on my blog entry on the techical aspects of the Oscar telecast. I put together a diagram of how an Oscar telecast announcer's voice travels from the Kodak Theater (now called Hollywood and Highland, due to Kodak being in Chapter 11 Bankruptcy and permission was recently granted by the bankruptcy court judge for Kodak to get out of the naming rights for the Kodak Theatre) in Hollywood to my HDTV set in St. Petersburg.
What are you waiting for? Check out my diagram here. Or, you can view the PDF version here as well.
And one more thing, and this is for Tom Kane if you are reading this blog:
As this is your second consecutive time announcing the Oscar telecast on ABC, your digitized voice will travel all over the place from the Kodak Theater in Hollywood to my HDTV set here in St. Petersburg. As such, enjoy the high speed digital voice over announcer ride, especially on Interstate 275 crossing the Howard Frankland Bridge (the segment on the Bright House Networks trunk cable from the Tampa headend to the St. Petersburg headend)!
Speaking of the 84th Annual Academy Awards telecast, if you got a rant or two - either before, during or after the Oscar telecast - feel free to comment. Just be sure to keep the comments clean and family friendly for everyone!
This article I found on 10 News (WTSP-TV, the CBS affiliate here in St. Petersburg) is scary if you believe in your rights to raise your children as you seem fit within the law:
Doctors to Vaccine Refusers: Go Somewhere Else (and we'll make a report to the Department of Children and Families, too)
Did I mention the Florida Department of Children and Families? Or the Florida Department of Complete Failure? They are supposed to protect our children from abuse and neglect but this agency will look to anything and everything to take your children away from you.
If you ever discipline your children by spanking them (which I recommend that you please make a personal commitment to never spank your child) and it leaves marks on your child so much that your child's teacher sees them then DCF is called. Once you get that dreaded call from your child's school and once you have not only your child's school principal but a law enforcement officer and an investigator from DCF in that conference room at school and you are led out of the school in handcuffs on child abuse charges, welcome to a lifetime of harassment by the Florida DCF, even if the charges against you are later dropped.
If your child's school is taking away your parental rights at the gate, such as the case at Virgil Mills Elementary School just outside of Ellenton, Florida (east of the southern terminus of Interstate 275 at Interstate 75), just think what your child's doctor or pediatrician is doing.
As a parent, you have the right to make reasonable medical decisions for your children. Since when does your child's doctor started making the decisions for you?
Many of you out there have been following the story on Bay News 9 where Florida Highway Patrol Trooper Dan Cole had a suspect in his custody. The suspect, 20 year old Danielle Maudsley, was being arrested on charges of leaving the scene of an accident and driving while license suspended or revoked.
NOTE: It should be noted that I do not condone what Danielle Maudsley did. However, this blog entry is based on how the arrest by Trooper Dan Cole was handled.
During processing, the suspect attempted to flee from the Florida Highway Patrol station in Pinellas Park. Trooper Cole discharged his Taser device on Danielle Maudsley, causing her to fall to the ground, which led to a series of events rendering Danielle in a vegetative state. An internal affairs investigation conducted by the Florida Highway Patrol into Trooper Cole’s actions plus an independent investigation conducted by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement recently cleared Trooper Cole of any wrongdoing.
There is dashcam video of what happened in the cruiser and what happened at the station which can be viewed at Bay News 9. I watched the video on Bay News 9 for myself. While many of you think that Trooper Cole was justified in his actions, to me this is gross conduct unbecoming a member of the Florida Highway Patrol in my book.
As I watched the video on Bay News 9, here are some key points that I feel Trooper Dan Cole mishandled when Danielle Maudsley was arrested.
1. When a suspect is placed under arrest, the policies of every law enforcement agency, including the Florida Highway Patrol, mandate the application of handcuffs upon the suspect, double locked and placed behind the back. Minor exceptions can be made depending on the suspect's condition and the likelihood of escape based on the charges.
During training in the law enforcement academy, recruits are instructed in the application of handcuffs in a manner that does not cause injury to the suspect being arrested. Ordinary regulation police handcuffs – whether they are chain or hinge connected – are kept in readiness until the time comes for their use.
Handcuffs are placed on the wrists of the suspect by pressing down on the ratchet bar gently on the wrist and allowing the ratchet bar to lock within the handcuffs’ locking mechanism. This is what is called single locking.
After both cuffs are applied onto both wrists, the cuffs are checked for proper fit using a standard universal handcuff key kept by the officer. While maintaining control of the suspect, the ratchet bar is adjusted for a comfortable yet secure fit; this is important due to the distance the officer must travel with the suspect, usually from the location of the arrest to the county jail or detention facility.
In Danielle Maudsley’s case, it is believed that her wrists may have been so small that she somehow managed to get out of one of the cuffs. In order to counteract this situation, a piece of plastic that affixes onto the cuffs – called handcuff helpers – is fixed onto the rigid part of the cuff to prevent any form of escape.
After the handcuffs are checked for comfortable yet secure fit, then the officer will lock the cuffs a second time using the tip of the handcuff key pressed down into a notch on top of the handcuffs locking mechanism. This is called double locking, and doing so prevents any travel of the ratchet bar in any direction. At this point the suspect can be safely placed in the police cruiser for transport to the county jail for booking.
Once in the secure confines of the booking area of the county jail, either the arresting officer or detention deputies will remove the handcuffs.
2. Once under arrest, the suspect is supposed to be taken from the place of arrest to the county jail or detention facility that has jurisdiction in the area. In Pinellas County, anyone arrested is taken to the Pinellas County Jail located on the campus of the Criminal Justice Center complex on 49 St N in Clearwater, while in Hillsborough County anyone arrested there is taken to the main Hillsborough County Jail on Orient Road in Tampa.
County jails – especially their booking facilities – provide maximum security to enable inmate booking and processing while at the same time the arresting officer can devote his or her time to completing the necessary paperwork including citations and arrest/incident reports. Instead of taking Danielle Maudsley from the place of arrest direct to the Pinellas County Jail, Trooper Dan Cole takes Ms. Maudsley to the Florida Highway Patrol station located on US 19 north of Gandy Blvd. in Pinellas Park.
Many older police facilities either do not have holding areas for suspects or have had their holding areas demolished and refurbished into other law enforcement uses, as is the case with the St. Petersburg Police Department in which the old city jail was turned into a communications center.
What Trooper Dan Cole should have done was to transport Danielle Maudsley directly from the place of arrest to the Pinellas County Jail. There Danielle would have been processed and booked like any other inmate coming into the jail while at the same time providing security to prevent any escape. While there, Trooper Cole could have completed his paperwork - such as the citations for leaving the scene of an accident and driving on a suspended license as well as the offense/incident report and the criminal report affidavit - right there at the jail.
3. In controlling the suspect, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement has a matrix of the proper use of force to be applied depending on the situation at hand. It is believed that while Danielle Maudsley was in the FHP station along with Trooper Dan Cole, Danielle was not secured properly enabling her to escape at the right moment.
In order to prevent Danielle from getting away, Trooper Cole decides that the best solution was to deploy the taser weapon. However, Florida Highway Patrol procedures do not justify the use of the taser on a suspect that is just fleeing; if Danielle became aggressive at Trooper Cole to the point that physical harm was imminent then the use of the taser would have been appropriate.
As I have seen in the video, it was demonstrated that Trooper Cole did not maintain adequate control over Danielle Maudsley during the period of custody, especially while in the FHP station. Furthermore, seeing how Trooper Cole discharged his taser is more typical of police and security forces in countries where human rights and civil liberties are not respected such as China, North Korea, Cuba or even Belarus.
Based on Danielle’s physical condition at the time of the arrest, upon impact by the taser a series of events began that led to Danielle falling down to the asphalt pavement striking her head upon impact. The turn of events rendered Danielle unconscious and has what resulted in Danielle being in a vegetative state with a poor prognosis, according to Bay News 9.
In fact, the way that Trooper Dan Cole used the taser on Danielle Maudsley raised a lot of questions, according to this St. Petersburg Times article.
Which leads me to believe the following, no introduction needed:
First, Trooper Dan Cole mishandled the arrest of Danielle Maudsley by not checking the proper fit of the handcuffs for transport and not taking her directly to the Pinellas County Jail. Instead, Trooper Cole decides to take Danielle to the FHP station where there is minimal to no security for arrested individuals while paperwork is completed.
Second, Trooper Cole should have enlisted the aid of another trooper in the station when Danielle Maudsley attempted to flee. As such, two troopers could have stopped Danielle from fleeing and going any further without resorting to the use of the taser.
Third, Trooper Cole was verbally abusive with Danielle throughout the entire process as was seen in the Bay News 9 video. Imagine for a moment: If Trooper Dan Cole treats any member of the public in any aggressive manner I think he treats anyone that he pulls over on Interstate 275 as part of a traffic stop.
After having read about the incident and watched the released dashcam video this is what I think regarding Trooper Dan Cole and his interactions with the public, especially when traffic stops are conducted:
Trooper Dan Cole’s actions are clearly a disgrace, not only to the Florida Highway Patrol and his fellow troopers in Troop C but to the law enforcement profession as well.
Trooper Dan Cole’s decision to use a taser on a young woman was uncalled for. Other than the fact that she was fleeing, Danielle Maudsley’s actions did not pose any threat to Trooper Dan Cole.
Trooper Dan Cole clearly violated the procedures of the Florida Highway Patrol when it comes to the use of the taser weapon. Trooper Cole did not give any warning to Danielle Maudsley before the taser was deployed. The proper procedure is the verbal warning of “Stop! Taser! Taser! Taser!” before the taser weapon is fired.
Moreover, Trooper Dan Cole had the assistance of other troopers at his disposal while at the FHP station in Pinellas Park. When Danielle Maudsley fled the FHP station, Trooper Cole had the opportunity to physically capture Danielle in a safe yet secure manner. Instead, Trooper Cole decided on his own initiative to use the taser weapon without any regard for the safety of the suspect in custody. (After all, the Florida Highway Patrol has policies regarding taser use).
Because of Trooper Dan Cole’s reckless and wanton actions in capturing a fleeing suspect which posed no danger whatsoever, Danielle Maudsley is in a rehabilitation center in Ft. Lauderdale, being assisted by life support machines. From what I found out on Bay News 9, the prognosis for Danielle is not good according to the doctors. Also due to Trooper Dan Cole’s actions, Danielle Maudsley’s mother is looking at medical bills which are reported to be in the seven figure category.
So, I have words of advice for FHP Trooper Dan Cole:
The way you handled Danielle Maudsley’s arrest on the leaving the scene of an accident and driving on a suspended license was way out of line. You mishandled the arrest right from the time you placed Danielle under arrest with the improper placement of the handcuffs.
You knew better when you decided to use the taser. According to the same St. Petersburg Times article I mentioned earlier, you joined the Florida Highway Patrol in 1998 and you were awarded Trooper of the Year for the Pinellas Park division in 2000. In that same article the last time you used the taser was in 2009 to save a man from jumping off the Sunshine Skyway Bridge; I believe your use of the taser was in a safe manner as you had other troopers assisting you.
I know a good majority of police procedures because I went to a citizen’s police academy in 2004.
You should understand what Danielle Maudsley's mother is going through right now, planning for the worst. No mother should not have to go through the potential of having to plan a funeral for her child at the most critical hour.
So please, do yourself, the Florida Highway Patrol and your fellow troopers in Troop C, and the general public - especially motorists on Interstate 275 in the St. Petersburg area - a favor: Step down from the force.
If you ever had an encounter with Florida Highway Patrol Trooper Dan Cole - especially a negative encounter such as if you were subjected to verbal abuse during a traffic stop for example - I invite you to please post your experience here. Just a reminder: All comments are moderated (when you click on the post your comment button you will not see your comment right away) and are subject to my approval before it appears here. As always, all commenting on my blogs are subject to the Community Guidelines, so you may want to review them from time to time.
When you apply for a car loan, a credit card, or even a home mortgage, your credit union will pull your credit report. A credit report shows how well you have handled your debts: Whether you pay your bills on time or late, whether you had a civil court judgment entered against you, whether you filed bankruptcy, and so on. After all, your credit report is personal to you.
As such, you have every right to keep anyone that does not have a need to know from dabbling into your credit report. Unfortunately, credit unions (and banks) are not the only ones that pull your credit report; other entities such as insurance companies and prospective employers are dabbling into your credit history.
With the recent economic downturn in America which has resulted in so many people losing their jobs (and the defaults and foreclosures that have followed), the credit reports of those who could not pay their bills because of job loss have been tremendously damaged. The end result: People are being turned down for a service or benefit all because of a credit report.
(There is also another element of a credit report called a credit score, but we'll just use the credit report in our discussion. After all, credit scores fluctuate from time to time but your credit report is a history of how well you have managed your debts. Most entries on a credit report remain for 7 years, with the only exception being bankruptcy which remains on your credit report for 10 years. Besides, a bankruptcy is akin to a nuclear attack on your credit report - your credit report and score takes a nosedive making it difficult for you to obtain credit.)
First, let's talk about the insurance companies. In particular, we'll talk about the auto insurance companies that want to dabble into your credit history.
Back in the old days, when you applied for auto insurance your prospective insurer took a look at your driving record to see if you had any tickets or serious violations such as DUI. Your prospective auto insurer also considers other variables such as whether you are male or female, single or married, and under 25 years of age or older. Based on this information, your insurer gave you a quote and if you were a safe driver, your insurer rewarded you with discounts.
Today, insurance companies have added another variable in underwriting auto insurance policies: The use of your credit report. Various elements of your credit report are used and the outcome is an insurance score. A bad insurance score could mean either higher premiums or outright denial of coverage. It has been reported that people that have good credit somehow get a poor insurance score.
One insurer - Travelers - makes a claim about the use of credit reports in determining what you pay for auto insurance. You can read their justification as to why a credit report should be a factor in what you pay for auto insurance.
The insurance companies claim that the use of credit reports is a predictor as to if a claim will be filed in the future or if an individual will commit insurance fraud. The way I look at it, that places people who have been impacted by insurance scores as a result of their credit reports as second class citizens.
After all, the use of credit reports by the auto insurance industry and labeling individuals as if they are a potential to have an auto accident or make a false insurance claim or even commit insurance fraud in the future amounts to nothing more than legalized discrimination in the name of insurance company profit.
What you can do: Do a search using your preferred search engine (such as Google) for "auto insurance without a credit report". There are companies out there that will write you an auto insurance policy without checking your credit report.
If you are applying to a well-known insurance company, be careful if you are asked for a Social Security Number and/or your state driver license number. These can be used to pull your credit report. I have heard horror stories that these credit report inquiries - which are supposed to be soft inquiries - are actually hard inquiries.
By the way, a soft inquiry does not have an impact on your credit report while a hard inquiry will not only impact your credit report, it will also drive down your credit score as well.
You have the right to say "no" if your insurer or prospective insurer will pull a credit report as part of the underwriting process. After all, your credit report is personal to you and you have every right to keep your insurer from dabbling into your private business. More than likely your application for insurance or renewal will be denied; but like I mentioned earlier, there are auto insurance companies out there that want your business without having to pull your credit report.
Now on to another alarmingly use of credit reports: Prospective employers when you apply for a job.
Traditionally, the only time a prospective employer would pull a credit report on you is if you were seeking a position of trust, such as a position in the financial services industry or in a position of public safety such as a police officer. That's the way it should be, as pulling a credit report as part of a background check is protection for the employer.
Unfortunately, when the American economy tanked unemployment skyrocketed and home values plummeted, placing black marks on the credit reports of people who otherwise had a steady job and paid the mortgage. At the same time, prospective employers resorted to harsh tactics to keep people from getting a decent job: The use of discriminatory language - completely legal - in saying that applications from prospective employees who are out of a job will not be accepted, as well as the routine use of credit reports when there is no justification based on the job and its duties.
In short: One who applies for a job and is hired, only to find out that he or she is terminated due to a credit report. What does a credit report have to do with an ordinary job when it's not justified?
What you can do: During the application process or even at the interview, find out what the background check will entail related to the position you are applying for. Again, your credit report is personal to you and you have a right to say "no" if you find out that your prospective employer has an unjustified reason for pulling your credit report.
If you refuse to permit your prospective employer to run a credit report on you, more than likely you will not be offered the position. After all, unless there is a major justification for doing so employers have no business dabbling into your financial affairs by pulling a credit report.
After all, we lock up our valuables in a place that is safe and secure and only let people that have a need to know to find out where it is. The same thing can be explained when it comes to your credit report.
Your credit report is personal and confidential to you, and the only entities that should be allowed to see your credit report are credit unions and banks as part of the loan underwriting process. You have every right to see that your credit report is guarded from unauthorized disclosure or access without your consent.
And as for those insurance companies who have a justified need to dabble into your personal affairs by pulling a credit report, this is how I look at it: My credit report is none of your business, period.
Speaking of credit reports, if you haven't pulled your once a year credit report, you can do so over at AnnualCreditReport.com. It's a good idea to check it at least once a year to catch any discrepancies that may show up. Moreover, you are also entitled to a copy of your credit report from a specific agency if adverse action was taken against you and a credit report from a particular credit reporting agency played a role in the decision; the name of the credit reporting agency will be in the letter you receive from the entity that denied you a benefit based on your credit report.
If you got a horror story about your experience when you apply for auto insurance or apply for a job and adverse action was taken against you thanks to the unauthorized use of your credit report, please feel free to share it here by making a comment. Please, no personally identifying information.
Imagine a world. In fact, imagine an Internet world.
Now imagine an Internet world without:
Wikipedia Facebook Twitter YouTube WordPress Blogger AKDart.com Skyscraper City and its road related forums eBay EdwardRingwald.com Interstate275Florida.com and the list goes on and on...
Sound scary, doesn't it?
If you tried to go to some of your favorite websites on Wednesday, 18 January 2012, you more than likely was greeted by a special page instead of the site's regular home page. What happened was some of these sites went dark in protest of two proposed United States federal laws that would have meant the end of the Internet as we know it today: The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA).
Now why should you be concerned?
According to this page from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, this is what SOPA and PIPA is all about in a nutshell: The new laws would have given government as well as Corporate America the power to interfere with the underlying infrastructure of the Internet. More alarmingly, the SOPA and PIPA would have given both government and Corporate America unprecedented power to shut down legitimate websites.
That's right, legitimate websites created by the little guy who wants to make his presence out there on the Internet. What Corporate America would do is to shut down the little guy's website with just a court order to the little guy's ISP or web hosting provider. I could go on forever talking about SOPA and PIPA but here's a YouTube video I found that explains the subject very well:
Luckily, SOPA and PIPA have been put on the back burner for now. The next time you think of SOPA and PIPA having an effect on the Internet as we know it, this is what can happen:
Sound scary? Be glad this is America, not China, Cuba, Myanmar (Burma) or even Saudi Arabia where Internet censorship is common and a routine way of life.
As 2011 fades into the sunset and 2012 rises at dawn, I want to wish everyone a Happy New Year! In Spanish, Feliz Año Nuevo! In Slovenian, Srečno novo leto! And in German, Glückliches neues Jahr!
If any year was newsworthy, 2011 was it. We started out 2011 here in St. Petersburg with the unfortunate loss of three St. Petersburg Police Officers and the funeral services that followed. Right as the funeral for Officer David Crawford was wrapping up another horrific news story was in the making across the bay in Tampa, and I watched the events unfold on Bay News 9: The horrific murder of Beau and Calyx Schenecker at the hands of their mother, Julie Schenecker.
Later on down the road in 2011 the Space Shuttle program came to an end with the launch of Space Shuttle Atlantis. I remember very well when the Space Shuttle program started in 1981 and the horrific explosion of the Space Shuttle Challenger in 1986; in fact, I was just coming out of classes at St. Petersburg College for the day and I was on my way home when I heard on the radio in my car that the Space Shuttle exploded after liftoff.
And we can't forget the biggest news story of 2011: Casey Anthony, found not guilty in the death of her 2-year old daughter, Caylee. The trial, held in Orlando for seven weeks, had a jury that had to come from Pinellas County due to the extensive pre-trial publicity. I was watching bits and pieces of the Casey Anthony trial on Bay News 9 at home, especially the closing arguments, and I thought Casey Anthony would be found guilty either as charged or on a lesser charge. I was at work watching Bay News 9 in the conference room next to my office when the verdict was read: Not guilty. The only offenses that Casey was guilty of was the four counts of lying to law enforcement.
I was shocked to see a not guilty verdict. There was a major uproar over the verdict after it was read; the Pinellas County jurors were fearing for their lives which is why the names of the jurors were not released for a few months. Unfortunately, this is how the American system of justice works.
We also have seen the end of a tradition which was on WMNF 88.5 FM for 25+ years: The end of the Polka Party Express, which aired its last show on Sunday, 20 March 2011. According to a blog entry I wrote earlier this year when the Polka Party Express pulled out of the station for the last time, it felt like the day when Amtrak pulled out of St. Petersburg for good in 1984.
Moreover, we also lost a Slovenian polka music legend on 29 September 2011: Lojze Slak. I enjoyed his music all the time, especially when it was played regularly on the Polka Party Express. My favorite Lojze Slak tune of all time? Glas Harmonike.
And we can't forget the first ever national test of the Emergency Alert System on 9 November 2011, which took place at 2 PM Eastern Time. The test from what I understand was far from perfect: The audio was garbled or hard to hear depending on what station you were tuned to as well as stations not even getting the test in the first place. If we want a better national warning system, it needs to be fixed.
Remember the reliable Emergency Broadcast System that served its purpose from 1963 to 1997? If you were growing up in that era (especially from the late 1960's onward) and you were watching Saturday morning cartoons, during commercial break a scary slide came on - sometimes with the Civil Defense symbol - and the infamous "this is a test" and the dreaded two-tone signal. Luckily, the Emergency Broadcast System did not have to be activated on a national scale, with the only exception being the EBS mishap in 1971.
So, if any year was newsworthy (other than the St. Petersburg Times writing scare stories about house values and the real estate crisis, thank you Mark Puente), 2011 was it. Did I mention the St. Petersburg Times?
When 2012 dawns come Sunday, 1 January 2012 the St. Petersburg Times will be known under a new name: The Tampa Bay Times. To me, this is a mistake. Why?
Let me set the record straight:
1. Tampa Bay is not only a body of water, it is the name of the region that encompasses two cities, St. Petersburg and Tampa, and within two counties, Pinellas and Hillsborough.
2. Tampa Bay is not a city, period.
3. We St. Petersburg residents have been accustomed to and know our daily newspaper as the St. Petersburg Times. This assures our identity as a city for well over 100 years.
4. We St. Petersburg residents are not part of Tampa nor Hillsborough County. In fact, it is the St. Petersburg Times that championed the cause for the creation of Pinellas County from the western part of Hillsborough County in 1912. In 2012 we celebrate 100 years of being a county separate and apart.
5. St. Petersburg slowly loses its identity as a city. We have been known by plenty of other monikers over the years such as God's Waiting Room among other things. Add to that the recent article in Men's Health about St. Petersburg being the most saddest city in America.
Don't the editors at Men's Health Magazine have something else to write about instead of labeling St. Petersburg in a negative spotlight? After all, depression knows no boundaries.
The St. Petersburg Times may be changing its name to the Tampa Bay Times come Sunday, 1 January 2012. However, it will continue to be the St. Petersburg Times in my book.
Christmas 2011 has come and gone, and I hope everyone had a Merry Christmas! Hopefully you got what you wanted and Santa was good to you.
Now comes the After Christmas stuff: The sales and the returns. Many of you may have to return something for a particular reason. So, if you plan on returning an item to exchange it for something else or a refund, you will want to keep some important pointers in mind:
1. Check your store's return and refund policy carefully. Note any fees you may be charged such as a restocking fee, especially for computer and electronics equipment. You can find out an individual store's policy just by going to their web site and clicking on the customer service link.
2. Bring your original sales receipt with you. This will eliminate plenty of inconvenience when you go to exchange or return an item. If you do not have your original receipt with you, more than likely you will be offered store credit so that you can purchase another item. Again, check your store's return policy.
Adhering to store policy and bringing your original receipt should make your return or exchange a breeze. However, there is an alarming trend with retailers when it comes to exchanges and refunds, and that is requiring ID and at the same time capturing the information on your ID! Just recently Best Buy has enacted a policy that requires ID from you when you return an item to them; as part of their return policy the information on your ID will be captured and entered into a secure database for the purpose of tracking returns.
What? Retailers such as Best Buy dabbling into your personal affairs by requiring and capturing ID when you return something? Best Buy, for instance, claims that their policy is to track customer returns as well as to cut down on return fraud; customer information captured is kept in a secure database and the information contained therein is not sold to third parties.
To me, Best Buy's return policy (as well as any other retailer requiring and capturing ID) is a recipe for identity theft. Any retailer can institute a legitimate return policy by having the customer fill out a form (which is generated by the register) with the customer's name and address, and the store clerk enters this information into the register. As to Best Buy's claim that the information captured from customer IDs is kept securely, the information will eventually end up being sold to third parties.
After all, despite federal laws prohibiting this practice the State of Florida has a habit of selling your name and address information on your driver's license to third parties. If the State of Florida sells your name and address information on your driver's license then I imagine what Best Buy is doing to your information when you return something to them for an exchange or refund.
Besides, as I mentioned in a previous blog entry a Florida Driver's License is the worst identity document to have in your possession other than the fact that you need it for driving a motor vehicle. You need it in case a law enforcement officer pulls you over or if you are in an accident. A Florida Driver's License contains - as required by the federal REAL ID law concerning standards for state drivers licenses - your name and your physical street address; in other words, where you live. Besides, a physical street address is a goldmine, not only for nosy and dabbling store clerks when it comes to returns but for stalkers and domestic violence perpetrators who happen to come across your license.
Any retailer that requires ID when you return an item will also try to claim that it is also their policy to help deter identity theft. Any retailer claiming the purpose of requiring ID to help deter identity theft is a false statement. Besides, store clerks have been involved in identity theft cases as the perpetrators!
So, what can you do to prevent your personal information from being misused at the hands of retailers such as Best Buy?
If you happen to have a passport or a passport card, use it as ID. Passports and passport cards do not have your physical street address on them, unlike a driver's license.
If you do not have either a passport or passport card, I would strongly recommend getting a passport card. It is a wallet size card and, being a federal identity document, meets REAL ID benchmarks. Not only you can use it when you check in for a domestic airline flight or to enter a federal facility, you can show your passport card as ID if in the event a retailer asks you. Passport cards cost $30 and are good for ten (10) years.
If you have a post office box as a mailing address, use it to your benefit. If in the event a retailer requires a street address, give your work street address - not the street address where you live. Again, residential street addresses are a goldmine not only for dabbling store clerks but for stalkers and domestic violence perpetrators too.
Be sure to hang on to your driver's license, but put that away in a safe place in your wallet or purse. The only time you need to produce your driver's license is in these situations:
1. While you are operating a motor vehicle. 2. In the event of a traffic stop. 3. In the event of a motor vehicle accident. Remember, you must carry your registration and proof of motor vehicle insurance as well - it's the law! 4. When you rent a car - after all, it is illegal for any rental car company such as Alamo or Dollar to rent to anyone without a valid driver's license.
Remember: If you are asked for ID by a retail store clerk, pull out your passport or passport card if you got one. This solves 99% of all ID required issues when it comes to retailers.
Now here's my take on retailers requiring ID when you return an item for exchange or refund, especially in light of Best Buy's new ID required for returns policy:
1. Retailers have a right to control return fraud. Asking the customer for his name and address is the first step and using the information only for the purpose of processing the return and destroying the information collected from the customer after a period of time - such as 60 days - ensures privacy for the customer.
2. If a retailer wants to require ID for a return, that's their business. At least the information from the ID should not be captured and held in a computer database subject to unauthorized access.
3. To law enforcement or to a rental car company, a driver's license is one thing. However, to retailers such as Best Buy, Wal-Mart, CompUSA or any other retailer known to ask for IDs from customers, my residential street address - in other words, where I live - is none of your business.
If you have had a horrific experience at a retailer when you went to return an item for exchange or refund, I would like to hear from you. Simply post a comment with your experience (please, no personal identifying information).
